I think Terminal E is supposed to finished in 2004. Continental will have all its international flights there. I think they're paying most or all of the costs, so it sounds like they'll get the whole terminal for themselves, with other international airlines still at Terminal D.

Surely they'll allow KLM in there also, dont you think?

------------------
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
~ConcordeBoy

Probably waiting on ETOPS certification for the RJ's....

BizJet, don't be so hard on ConcordeBoy...

As someone who's more familiar with the Mexico market than the average FT'er (check out the AeroCalifornia forum; just flew back from Mexico yesterday), I agree that IAH-MAD makes sense on a few levels:

1. Connections with Air Europa throughout Spain. It makes plenty of sense that CO should link it's largest hub with a partner.

2. Houston, given it's demographics, has something of a connection with Spain-- more so than with Italy, for example.

3. Houston has service from many Latin America cities that do not have direct service to EWR. I'd say CO is easily the most influential US carrier in Mexico, and a trip from many of these Mexican destinations would require a double connection xxx-IAH-EWR-MAD. The same can be said about connections via IAH-AMS. From what I know from the dozens of friends and acquaintences who have solicited my help for Mexico-Europe tickets, many are not willing to make multiple connections in the name of brand loyalty. A single IAH connection is acceptable.

The route would be _very_ high yield because fares from Mexico to Europe are _not_ cheap!! And as far as equipment, how about one of those EMB5500s-- the super long range RJ with a BF seat?!?! Seriously, though, I think CO could at least start with a 757 summer seasonal, and work up from there.

As an aside, a buddy of mine flew yesterday MTY-MEX-MAD on a full C on AM. $3200 one way that could have gone to CO.....

Viajero Joven, The 757-200, even with ETOPS, would splash into the Atlantic about a thousand miles short of Madrid.

Technicalities.... We never get to use those rafts, anyways.

Viajero Joven,

Tus ideas tienen mucho sentido. Since you seem to know something about this, maybe you can help me out with this question:

What happens with immigration? Given that for every int. flight arriving to the U.S. they make you pass through customs/immigration before you catch your connecting flight, how would this work for someone who didn't have papers to get into the U.S. Do you have to get some type of visa just to connect? If not, do they have a problem of people pretending to connect to other countries but really staying in the U.S.?

FWIW, I thought that CO flew between IAH and MAD in the past. I fly to MAD numerous times a year, and when I have searched for itineraries (this past summer for example), I have have been offered the itinerary: LGA-IAH-MAD. The only thing I can think of to negate this is the idea that it was offering me an extension of the EWR-MAD flight, but this seems unlikely.

Bingo! I can't speak for the IAH-MAD routing, but I can tell you that CO63 MAD-IAH is actually CO63 MAD-EWR on a 777 and "continuing service" as CO63 from EWR-IAH on a 764.

aparsuites, los pasajeros en transito por los Estados Unidos no necesitan visas-- solo que no pueden salir de la area de migracion del aeropuerto. Das cuenta que la area de migracion en IAH esta debajo de los salones de espera-- y se puede entrar el avion desde arriba o desde abajo. Cada dia hay gente que se queda dentro la area encerrada.

Ademas...... en algun entonces es posible que el vuelo EWR-MAD empezo en IAH-- pero por cuentiones de migracion, un pasajero en transito por los EUA debe subirse en un vuelo sin escala, no en un vuelo directo con 1 escala.


Translation:

Passengers in transit through the US can't exit the immigration area of the airport. Consider that the IAH immigration area is below the waiting area-- and one can enter the plane from above or below. Every day there are people who stay within the closed area.

And......... at one time, the EWR-MAD flight may have begun in IAH-- but for immigration reasons, a passenger transiting the US has to take a nonstop flight, not a direct 1 stop flight.


[This message has been edited by Viajero Joven (edited 04-16-2002).]

Gracias por la respuesta.

TRANSLATION:

Thanks for the response.

Is this setup where int. passengers can stay within the secure area particular to IAH or can similar connections be made at EWR/JFK?

I ask in particular because I have some Mexican friends who I'd like to give reward tickets to Spain, but first I'd need to know how this issue is delt with.

[This message has been edited by aparsuites (edited 04-16-2002).]

aparsuites, you just struck the core of the benefit for the IAH-MAD nonstop: there are transit facilities like this in about every major international airport--- but the key is, the flights into the country and out of the country must be nonstop. If someone wants to fly from Guadalajara to Madrid, they simply cannot use CO if CO does not serve both cities nonstop from a common airport.

FWIW, KLM may be about the only alternative, with nonstops from MEX to AMS-- and Azteca has some connections into MEX from other Mexican cities.

IAH-MAD won't have the high-yield O&D business traffic that MIA-MAD and NYC-MAD have, but I think that there are enough conncetion possibilites that IAH-MAD could work out with a 764. AA used to have DFW-MAD service, but moved it to MIA to take advantage of MIA's O&D base and better Latin American connections. MAD is one of AA's biggest cash cows.

How about you and Viajero compromise... fly a 762 there; it's got 767 range, but 757 number of seats

------------------
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
~ConcordeBoy

OK, a 767 sounds fine to me. Does Co have any to spare??

FWIW: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/000008.html

Looks like Iberia is pulling out of the Central America--Spain market. That means: 1. more pax for CO, but 2. en route pax would need a visa for the US. Hmm...... I don't know how official this is, but it's something to consider.

Sorry, I'll wait for the ETOPS Trans-Pacific version of the Jungle Jet.